1 1.10 Application of estuarine and coastal classifications in marine ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Sites are first classified into one of nine wetland disturbance classes according to a set of criteria based on site conditions and disturbance types. Based on the soil type, each site is then classified as one of six restoration types that refer to the wetland type that could be restored or enhanced. DCM classifies potential wetland restoration and enhancement sites according to the wetland plant community types that they are likely to support once they are restored or enhanced (Figure 29). The development of the classification scheme for potential wetland restoration and enhancement sites is based on soil taxonomy, a frequency analysis of DCM’s wetland type mapping results (wetland type vs. soil mapping unit), landscape position, and best professional judgment from wetland scientists and soil scientists. 1.10.10.2 Identifying and Prioritizing Restoration Sites in Puget Sound, Oregon USA The sub-estuaries of Puget Sound have lost more than 80% of tidal marsh habitats in the past 150 years and efforts are underway to restore priority areas. Dean et al. (2000) used spatial data and GIS techniques to calculate the extent of loss in the Skagit River estuary and to identify and rank areas that would be appropriate for restoring estuarine habitat for the benefit of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and other threatened or endangered species. Selection criteria were based on ecologically meaningful characteristics of the landscape (following Shreffler and Thom 1993), balanced with criteria ranking ease of restoration. Landscape variables included areas of tidal and seasonal flooding, hydrological connectivity and ecological sustainability with the final site prioritization classification developed with a tally of scores from each criterion (i.e., 0= outside flood corridor; 4= inside flood corridor). Hydrology was the basis for classifying connectivity and this was 62
achieved by identifying barriers to the flow of water (i.e. major roads, levees or dikes) relative to known salmon movement corridors such as barriers to juvenile-bearing fresh water (Skagit River), salt water (Skagit Bay, Padilla Bay, Swinomish Channel) or adjacent to both. For sustainability, a higher score was assigned to larger areas of wetland with the assumption that a larger area is more sustainable than a smaller area. For ease of restoration, public land was scored more highly than private and natural vegetation (forest, marsh) scored more highly than agriculture and impervious surfaces and plots with fewer owners received higher scores than many owners. To define the priority ranking classes, scores were summed for every quarter-acre cell, and the scores were divided into four priority ranges with Priority 1 being the highest priority and 4 the lowest (Figure 30). 1.10.11 CLASSIFYING AND MAPPING SOCIO-ECONOMIC PATTERNS Human use patterns, anthropogenic stressors/pressures and economic evaluations of goods and services are some of the human dimensions data that are increasingly being represented by classifications that play an important role in marine spatial planning and the evaluation of potential threats. Not only do these data help in planning, but also provide an effective way to evaluate the likely economic impact of marine spatial planning decisions. Human dimensions data are complex to depict spatially and very diverse, but significant advances have been made to map social data including ecosystem valuations that can help prioritize management activities. Economic value can be shown in various ways, Figure 31 shows a section of the Baltic Sea that has been classified according to its tourism value represented by recreational boating 63
Page 1 and 2:
1.10 Application of estuarine and c
Page 3 and 4:
SYNOPSIS Coastal and marine classif
Page 5 and 6:
government and non-governmental man
Page 7 and 8:
paucity of species and habitat data
Page 9 and 10:
and many sub-catastrophic disturban
Page 11 and 12: conservation practitioners, industr
Page 13 and 14: levels of the hierarchy are defined
Page 15 and 16: distributions, both within and surr
Page 17 and 18: In a hierarchical framework for the
Page 19 and 20: 1.10.2.3 Australian Coastal Classif
Page 21 and 22: Ecological theory predicts that the
Page 23 and 24: outbreaks in the late 1970s (Green
Page 25 and 26: intertidal zones, and shallow coast
Page 27 and 28: 1.10.3.1 Identifying Priority Conse
Page 29 and 30: y the Massachusetts Oceans Act (200
Page 31 and 32: eight color coded zones to provide
Page 33 and 34: appropriate place to investigate fe
Page 35 and 36: 1.10.4.3 Massachusetts Ocean Plan T
Page 37 and 38: One of the foundational concepts un
Page 39 and 40: ecosystems has shown that considera
Page 41 and 42: In May 2004, Germany was the first
Page 43 and 44: improve the design and interpretati
Page 45 and 46: NOAA’s CoastWatch Change Analysis
Page 47 and 48: ground resolution of 30 m. Each cla
Page 49 and 50: also be used to assess the role of
Page 51 and 52: States (Gundlach and Hayes 1978). T
Page 53 and 54: information at the species level. I
Page 55 and 56: 1.10.8.4 Classifying and Mapping Hu
Page 57 and 58: map of the entire Australian shorel
Page 59 and 60: within 11 regions, leading to an ov
Page 61: enhancement of certain functions in
Page 65 and 66: ecosystem service values extracted
Page 67 and 68: 1.10.12 FUTURE DIRECTIONS AND PRIOR
Page 69 and 70: 1.10.12.1 Linking Patterns and Proc
Page 71 and 72: approach. New classifications will
Page 73 and 74: Arundel, H. and Mount, R. 2007. Nat
Page 75 and 76: Connell, J. H. 1978. Diversity in t
Page 77 and 78: Duke. N.C., Meynecke, J.O., Dittman
Page 79 and 80: Green, A.L., C.E. Birkeland, R.H. R
Page 81 and 82: Hiddink, J. G., Jennings, S., Kaise
Page 83 and 84: Kostylev, V., Todd, B.J., Fader, G.
Page 85 and 86: Maxwell, D.L., Stelzenmüller, V.,
Page 87 and 88: Spatial and temporal patterns in fi
Page 89 and 90: Sharples, C. 2006. Indicative Mappi
Page 91 and 92: Wells, S., Ravilous, C., Corcoran,
Page 93 and 94: FIGURE LEGENDS Figure 1. A) Classes
Page 95 and 96: Figure 10. Ecological evaluation in
Page 97 and 98: Figure 21. Combining 'intolerance'
Page 99 and 100: selected planning units in gray ins
Page 101 and 102: Box 2. Classifications as thematic
Page 103 and 104: Figure 1. 1
Page 113 and 114:
Figure 11. 11
Page 115 and 116:
Figure 13. 13
Page 117 and 118:
Figure 15. Fishing effort (hrs/day)
Page 119 and 120:
Figure 17. 17
Page 121 and 122:
Figure 19. 100% Conversion. 80% 60%
Page 123 and 124:
Figure 21. 21
Page 125 and 126:
Figure 23. 23
Page 127 and 128:
Figure 25. 25
Page 129 and 130:
Figure 27. 27
Page 131 and 132:
Figure 29. 29
Page 133 and 134:
Figure 31. 31
Page 135:
Figure 33. 33
show all

1 1.10 Application of estuarine and coastal classifications in marine ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?